TKO question
- Thread starter Cyrano
- Start date
P is the number of decks played, D is the number of decks remaining, RC is the Running Count and TC is the true count, the formula expressed as (RC - 4P)/D = TC, provided that you use zero as your initial running count (IRC). This makes sense if you realize that the Pivot Point remains constant or same number no matter where you are in the shoe
hope this helps
hope this helps
Thanks Ken.
Yes, it helps. It sounds like I should set my IRC to -4P and just divide by decks, right? If I'm not mistaken, that means my TC will always stay 4 below the normal TC. For example, starting off at 6 decks, where the Hi-Lo is 0, the IRC should be -24/6=-4 for TKO.
By the way, do you know which simulator I can use to get index numbers for TKO? I've tried CVCX and BJ678. Neither calculates the True-Count for unbalanced systems.
_______
P is the number of decks played, D is the number of decks remaining, RC is the Running Count and TC is the true count, the formula expressed as (RC - 4P)/D = TC, provided that you use zero as your initial running count (IRC). This makes sense if you realize that the Pivot Point remains constant or same number no matter where you are in the shoe
hope this helps
Yes, it helps. It sounds like I should set my IRC to -4P and just divide by decks, right? If I'm not mistaken, that means my TC will always stay 4 below the normal TC. For example, starting off at 6 decks, where the Hi-Lo is 0, the IRC should be -24/6=-4 for TKO.
By the way, do you know which simulator I can use to get index numbers for TKO? I've tried CVCX and BJ678. Neither calculates the True-Count for unbalanced systems.
_______
P is the number of decks played, D is the number of decks remaining, RC is the Running Count and TC is the true count, the formula expressed as (RC - 4P)/D = TC, provided that you use zero as your initial running count (IRC). This makes sense if you realize that the Pivot Point remains constant or same number no matter where you are in the shoe
hope this helps
why would you go through all this trouble Ko works
pretty good in it standard form. I use 0=IRC 16=Key
and 24=pivot and insurance at 23 on 6 decks this IRC
keeps me out of neg numbers most of the time there are also a few tweaks
that works very well for ko on six decks(you can get some bigger bets out sooner) let me know I will pass a few on to ya also what state are you playing
in
pretty good in it standard form. I use 0=IRC 16=Key
and 24=pivot and insurance at 23 on 6 decks this IRC
keeps me out of neg numbers most of the time there are also a few tweaks
that works very well for ko on six decks(you can get some bigger bets out sooner) let me know I will pass a few on to ya also what state are you playing
in
So we all know there's been a long-standing debate that goes something like this: KO is the easiest count and anybody who is learning KO shouldn't try to true-count it, right? That made sense the first time I heard it and it still makes sense now. But what if we throw in a couple curveballs? Curveball 1: I'm comfortable enough in KO to try to add to the EV (I have 50 index numbers under my belt) and Curveball 2: I understand true-counting an unbalanced count gives you a greater advantage than true-counting a balanced count (TKO will perform better than Hi-Lo) and true'ing will give me the flexibility to apply one set of indices for all decks. I had the choice of either TC'ing KO or adding an Ace side-count. Since TKO has a little more readily-available literature, I'm leaning towards that route (though I'm also considering learning an unbalanced level 2 count). I play in N. 'vada... mostly pitch games. When I was researching which count to use, I almost picked UBZ. Maybe I should switch. Do you have any opinions? Of the three: 1) TKO 2) Ace side-count or 3) switch to UBZ, which gives me the most "bang for the buck"? This is a very subjective question, so I won't hold you responsible for any feedback. ;-)
Another consideration: I'm thinking about learning shuffle-tracking in about a year's time(when I move to shoe-play) and TC will "train" me to estimate where the slugs are. Ken, if you want to get in touch with me, I've set up an email
[email protected].
-------------
why would you go through all this trouble Ko works
pretty good in it standard form. I use 0=IRC 16=Key
and 24=pivot and insurance at 23 on 6 decks this IRC
keeps me out of neg numbers most of the time there are also a few tweaks
that works very well for ko on six decks(you can get some bigger bets out sooner) let me know I will pass a few on to ya also what state are you playing
in
Another consideration: I'm thinking about learning shuffle-tracking in about a year's time(when I move to shoe-play) and TC will "train" me to estimate where the slugs are. Ken, if you want to get in touch with me, I've set up an email
[email protected].
-------------
why would you go through all this trouble Ko works
pretty good in it standard form. I use 0=IRC 16=Key
and 24=pivot and insurance at 23 on 6 decks this IRC
keeps me out of neg numbers most of the time there are also a few tweaks
that works very well for ko on six decks(you can get some bigger bets out sooner) let me know I will pass a few on to ya also what state are you playing
in
Well I think if you are playing single deck I
would definatly keep a side count of Aces.
Double deck assume an IRC of 0. If you use a different IRC, you can adjust the numbers by subtracting your IRC from the index number if it is negative and adding it to the index number if you have a positive IRC.This is the equvalent
of a hi lo count or True counting KO, pivot # always remains the same
Two Deckers
Decks Played TC => +1 TC => +2 TC => +3
0.5 4 5 7
1.0 5 6 7
1.5 7 7 8
No two games are exactly alike. a two-deck game,
up to 1/2 deck gone:
2 units @ 0
4 units @ +1
6 units @ +3
8 units @ +4
>1/2 deck to 1 deck gone:
2 units @ +1
4 units @ +2
6 units @ +3
8 units @ +4
>1 deck to 1 1/2 decks gone:
2 units @ +2
6 units @ +3
8 units @ +4
The gain in estimating the TC are primarily from being able to put out a medium-sized bet earlier than you would with the "standard" model and avoid putting out such a bet later in the pack
again hope this helps
Ken
would definatly keep a side count of Aces.
Double deck assume an IRC of 0. If you use a different IRC, you can adjust the numbers by subtracting your IRC from the index number if it is negative and adding it to the index number if you have a positive IRC.This is the equvalent
of a hi lo count or True counting KO, pivot # always remains the same
Two Deckers
Decks Played TC => +1 TC => +2 TC => +3
0.5 4 5 7
1.0 5 6 7
1.5 7 7 8
No two games are exactly alike. a two-deck game,
up to 1/2 deck gone:
2 units @ 0
4 units @ +1
6 units @ +3
8 units @ +4
>1/2 deck to 1 deck gone:
2 units @ +1
4 units @ +2
6 units @ +3
8 units @ +4
>1 deck to 1 1/2 decks gone:
2 units @ +2
6 units @ +3
8 units @ +4
The gain in estimating the TC are primarily from being able to put out a medium-sized bet earlier than you would with the "standard" model and avoid putting out such a bet later in the pack
again hope this helps
Ken
sorry the numbers on the last post were
not lined up, this should be easier to read
this shows
you can adjust the key count
accordinting to where you are in the deck
the pivot point would be 8 and that = a hi lo TC of +4
Two Deckers
Decks Played TC => +1 TC => +2 TC => +3
--0.5---------------4----------5-------7
--1.0---------------5----------6--------7
--1.5---------------7----------7--------8
not lined up, this should be easier to read
this shows
you can adjust the key count
accordinting to where you are in the deck
the pivot point would be 8 and that = a hi lo TC of +4
Two Deckers
Decks Played TC => +1 TC => +2 TC => +3
--0.5---------------4----------5-------7
--1.0---------------5----------6--------7
--1.5---------------7----------7--------8